This has been trialled in East Sussex for a while now, not officially obviously, but because the potholes and the general state of the roads means that in many areas driving at anything more than 20 miles an hour risks damage to your tyres, wheels and suspension.
It's not often I disagree with you @Tikay10 but I do on this one. 20 miles an hour, whilst arguably increasing safety, will massively increase congestion, further reduce air quality and waste thousands of hours of the working week. The safety issue can quite easily be achieved, as it is now, by simply putting temporary 20 mph speed limits where needed e.g. outside schools at dropping off and picking up time, or road calming measures, such as speed bumps, in residential areas.
I would imagine it's an attempt to stop people driving, which it won't, it will simply mean they spend more time sitting in their cars with their engines on when they do.
20 mph is not a good speed for most ICE cars and many will simply just use 1st gear (as it's much more difficult to exceed 20 in 1st), thus resulting in processions of slow moving traffic revving the guts out of their engines, that'll be great!
It is a difficult question. And there are sensible opinions on both sides. However, I would add 1 thing that regularly appears in this debate that is extremely misleading.
There are statistics that show that the majority of children hit at 30 mph die. And that the majority hit at 20 mph survive. And this is used as some sort of argument that 20 mph is the "safe" speed.
The above is ridiculous. In almost every instance the driver is braking/taking avoiding action before impact. In normal driving conditions, the stopping distance at 30 mph is 23 metres-that is just 6 car lengths. To get to 0 mph. Reducing from 30 is pretty much immediate.
There has to be a time and a place where reducing the speed limit to 20 mph makes sense. But it is most certainly not all 30 mph zones.
Driving more slowly should alleviate congestion, not make it worse.
Actually MCN had a protest against N.W.P. demonisation of bikers about 10 years ago. 10,000 bikers rode from Devils Bridge, The Ponderosa Cafe and The Raven to meet at Swallow Falls in Betws Y Coed.
The rule was simple ride at or under the speed limit, the result was 8 - 10 hours of total gridlock. N.W.P. admitted that it basically closed down Wales from Bangor back to Llangollen as the congestion caused havoc.
Oh and for the slower is cleaner brigade. Sorry it isn't, Vehicles running at 20 mph are not running efficiently and therefore are actually putting out higher emissions than those running at optimal settings.
Can't wait for the whinging locals to start moaning about traffic going through the villages at 3 am because it now takes 4 hours to get to the mountains instead of 2.
I spent 7 years putting £10,000 a year into the North Wales economy and I love the area and it's people and I still visit regularly maybe as much as 90 days a year, but I would encourage anybody visiting for tourist or outdoor activities to consider The Peak District, The Lakes, Scotland or the North Yorks Moors.
Drakeford and his band of Zealots want your money. However, they would rather it be without your vehicles, and one would suppose without you actually enjoying yourself.
I have a week in Powys already booked starting 23 Sept so I will report back on what difference it actually makes to that trip. If it causes too much of a problem then it may well be my last.
On congested sections of Motorways, when they impose those annoying 40/50/60MPH "Variable Speed Limits" it's been clearly shown that it eases congestion.
I do get why people are opposed to the 20mph thing, but it's not THAT big an imposition on our lives really, is it?
On congested sections of Motorways, when they impose those "Variable Speed Limits" it's been clearly shown that it eases congestion.
I do get why people are opposed to the 20mph thing, but it's not THAT big an imposition on our lives really, is it?
It's a big money earner if you think about it 33/34mph in a 30mph limit usually no action taken 25mph in a 20mph limit, have a fine, 3 points and welcome to Wales.
So that's a fine and increased insurance premiums not to mention the wear and tear of trying to keep your car at 20 or under. The gearbox will fall apart because it will all be 1st and 2nd and bikes will never get out of 1st gear and fuel economy will go to rats.
33.3% added to any journey time where you stick to the limit.
Next thing we know we will be getting slipstreamed by cyclists, skateboarders, milk floats and the occasional tortoise.
On congested sections of Motorways, when they impose those "Variable Speed Limits" it's been clearly shown that it eases congestion.
I do get why people are opposed to the 20mph thing, but it's not THAT big an imposition on our lives really, is it?
It's a big money earner if you think about it 33/34mph in a 30mph limit usually no action taken 25mph in a 20mph limit, have a fine, 3 points and welcome to Wales.
So that's a fine and increased insurance premiums not to mention the wear and tear of trying to keep your car at 20 or under. The gearbox will fall apart because it will all be 1st and 2nd and bikes will never get out of 1st gear and fuel economy will go to rats.
33.3% added to any journey time where you stick to the limit.
Next thing we know we will be getting slipstreamed by cyclists, skateboarders, milk floats and the occasional tortoise.
You can avoid the fines & the resultant additional insurance premiums though simply by observing the limit.
On congested sections of Motorways, when they impose those "Variable Speed Limits" it's been clearly shown that it eases congestion.
I do get why people are opposed to the 20mph thing, but it's not THAT big an imposition on our lives really, is it?
It's a big money earner if you think about it 33/34mph in a 30mph limit usually no action taken 25mph in a 20mph limit, have a fine, 3 points and welcome to Wales.
So that's a fine and increased insurance premiums not to mention the wear and tear of trying to keep your car at 20 or under. The gearbox will fall apart because it will all be 1st and 2nd and bikes will never get out of 1st gear and fuel economy will go to rats.
33.3% added to any journey time where you stick to the limit.
Next thing we know we will be getting slipstreamed by cyclists, skateboarders, milk floats and the occasional tortoise.
You can avoid the fines & the resultant additional insurance premiums though simply by observing the limit.
Yes that's true Tony but it's slower than your average club cyclist will ride. Seriously, there's nothing wrong with a 20mph limit outside schools, hospitals, care homes, or on housing estates etc but on a general road I think it's lunacy driven by some crazy political thinking.
It's also impractical for modern vehicles, you're either going to be screaming the knackers off in first, chuggaboom like in second and stalling every 100 yards or up and down between the two until paralysis of the clutch foot kicks in.
Oh and automatics are just going to love it as the gearbox has to phone a friend.
On congested sections of Motorways, when they impose those annoying 40/50/60MPH "Variable Speed Limits" it's been clearly shown that it eases congestion.
I do get why people are opposed to the 20mph thing, but it's not THAT big an imposition on our lives really, is it?
I can understand that on a motorway, it prevents people piling into a situation at 70+ and then having to come to a very quick slow down and the knock on effects that has, 40/50/60 variable speed limits are used as lots of people are idiots.
In a 30 (becoming 20 zone), if your commute is 15 miles each way you will go from spending an hour a day in your car to an hour and a half a day, not much really, unless you equate it to 3 working WEEKS per year (2.5hrs/week x 48 working weeks= 120 hours/annum).
On congested sections of Motorways, when they impose those annoying 40/50/60MPH "Variable Speed Limits" it's been clearly shown that it eases congestion.
I do get why people are opposed to the 20mph thing, but it's not THAT big an imposition on our lives really, is it?
I can understand that on a motorway, it prevents people piling into a situation at 70+ and then having to come to a very quick slow down and the knock on effects that has, 40/50/60 variable speed limits are used as lots of people are idiots.
In a 30 (becoming 20 zone), if your commute is 15 miles each way you will go from spending an hour a day in your car to an hour and a half a day, not much really, unless you equate it to 3 working WEEKS per year (2.5hrs/week x 48 working weeks= 120 hours/annum).
I doubt if there will be any sections of "20" that are 15 miles in length, or anything like that long. The new 20mph zones are ONLY where it was previously a 30, & that's largely just town centres & housing estates. In a 15 mile commute, I'd be surprised if the "20" exceeds 5 miles. (Pure guess, admittedly).
On congested sections of Motorways, when they impose those annoying 40/50/60MPH "Variable Speed Limits" it's been clearly shown that it eases congestion.
I do get why people are opposed to the 20mph thing, but it's not THAT big an imposition on our lives really, is it?
I can understand that on a motorway, it prevents people piling into a situation at 70+ and then having to come to a very quick slow down and the knock on effects that has, 40/50/60 variable speed limits are used as lots of people are idiots.
In a 30 (becoming 20 zone), if your commute is 15 miles each way you will go from spending an hour a day in your car to an hour and a half a day, not much really, unless you equate it to 3 working WEEKS per year (2.5hrs/week x 48 working weeks= 120 hours/annum).
I doubt if there will be any sections of "20" that are 15 miles in length, or anything like that long. The new 20mph zones are ONLY where it was previously a 30, & that's largely just town centres & housing estates. In a 15 mile commute, I'd be surprised if the "20" exceeds 5 miles. (Pure guess, admittedly).
Ok I appreciate it might be a bit of an extreme example but then multiply the 5 miles by the hundreds of thousands, or millions, of journeys that are going to take longer.
Comments
It's not often I disagree with you @Tikay10 but I do on this one. 20 miles an hour, whilst arguably increasing safety, will massively increase congestion, further reduce air quality and waste thousands of hours of the working week. The safety issue can quite easily be achieved, as it is now, by simply putting temporary 20 mph speed limits where needed e.g. outside schools at dropping off and picking up time, or road calming measures, such as speed bumps, in residential areas.
I would imagine it's an attempt to stop people driving, which it won't, it will simply mean they spend more time sitting in their cars with their engines on when they do.
20 mph is not a good speed for most ICE cars and many will simply just use 1st gear (as it's much more difficult to exceed 20 in 1st), thus resulting in processions of slow moving traffic revving the guts out of their engines, that'll be great!
There are statistics that show that the majority of children hit at 30 mph die. And that the majority hit at 20 mph survive. And this is used as some sort of argument that 20 mph is the "safe" speed.
The above is ridiculous. In almost every instance the driver is braking/taking avoiding action before impact. In normal driving conditions, the stopping distance at 30 mph is 23 metres-that is just 6 car lengths. To get to 0 mph. Reducing from 30 is pretty much immediate.
There has to be a time and a place where reducing the speed limit to 20 mph makes sense. But it is most certainly not all 30 mph zones.
The rule was simple ride at or under the speed limit, the result was 8 - 10 hours of total gridlock. N.W.P. admitted that it basically closed down Wales from Bangor back to Llangollen as the congestion caused havoc.
Oh and for the slower is cleaner brigade. Sorry it isn't, Vehicles running at 20 mph are not running efficiently and therefore are actually putting out higher emissions than those running at optimal settings.
Can't wait for the whinging locals to start moaning about traffic going through the villages at 3 am because it now takes 4 hours to get to the mountains instead of 2.
I spent 7 years putting £10,000 a year into the North Wales economy and I love the area and it's people and I still visit regularly maybe as much as 90 days a year, but I would encourage anybody visiting for tourist or outdoor activities to consider The Peak District, The Lakes, Scotland or the North Yorks Moors.
Drakeford and his band of Zealots want your money. However, they would rather it be without your vehicles, and one would suppose without you actually enjoying yourself.
I have a week in Powys already booked starting 23 Sept so I will report back on what difference it actually makes to that trip. If it causes too much of a problem then it may well be my last.
Correct. (IMO)
On congested sections of Motorways, when they impose those annoying 40/50/60MPH "Variable Speed Limits" it's been clearly shown that it eases congestion.
I do get why people are opposed to the 20mph thing, but it's not THAT big an imposition on our lives really, is it?
Is it more efficient driving at 20 compared to 30 ?
Its hard to measure.
25mph in a 20mph limit, have a fine, 3 points and welcome to Wales.
So that's a fine and increased insurance premiums not to mention the wear and tear of trying to keep your car at 20 or under. The gearbox will fall apart because it will all be 1st and 2nd and bikes will never get out of 1st gear and fuel economy will go to rats.
33.3% added to any journey time where you stick to the limit.
Next thing we know we will be getting slipstreamed by cyclists, skateboarders, milk floats and the occasional tortoise.
You can avoid the fines & the resultant additional insurance premiums though simply by observing the limit.
It's also impractical for modern vehicles, you're either going to be screaming the knackers off in first, chuggaboom like in second and stalling every 100 yards or up and down between the two until paralysis of the clutch foot kicks in.
Oh and automatics are just going to love it as the gearbox has to phone a friend.
I'll give it 3 years tops.
In a 30 (becoming 20 zone), if your commute is 15 miles each way you will go from spending an hour a day in your car to an hour and a half a day, not much really, unless you equate it to 3 working WEEKS per year (2.5hrs/week x 48 working weeks= 120 hours/annum).
@Enut
"if your commute is 15 miles each way"
I doubt if there will be any sections of "20" that are 15 miles in length, or anything like that long. The new 20mph zones are ONLY where it was previously a 30, & that's largely just town centres & housing estates. In a 15 mile commute, I'd be surprised if the "20" exceeds 5 miles. (Pure guess, admittedly).
Must be difficult to go over 20mph with your wellies on though?